Nehru-Patel-Kashmir - Straight from horse's mouth - Sam Manekshaw

[jaathiratnalu2]

2 minutes ago, bhaigan said:

first nee meede ummutharu 

pakka ki veli aduko 

Sanghi's for a reason

Arey Musugu sanghi , Nuvvu chedabuttavu ra peaceful community lo

[bhaigan]

9 minutes ago, Spartan said:

 

  .AIDS to poyadu antaru mari.. 

WhatsApp University Propaganda na ??

Nenu anduke boothulu titedi Sanghi's ni , valu chesina attrocities inni anni kadu through WhatsApp university propaganda's

@psycopk emo nannu apologize cheyamantadu

[Spartan]

3 minutes ago, bhaigan said:

WhatsApp University Propaganda na ??

Nenu anduke boothulu titedi Sanghi's ni , valu chesina attrocities inni anni kadu through WhatsApp university propaganda's

@psycopk emo nannu apologize cheyamantadu

 

see you are missing basic point in cnversation...

Modi, Rahul Sonia, Amit...vellani tittu....they are outsiders..

but you use bad language against members which is personal... adi vaddu antunnadu @psycopk and I also suggest to do the same to have proper conversation.

 

[JonSnowUSA]

58 minutes ago, bhaigan said:

Nehru is a Kashmiri pandit first, Nehru knows about Kashmir very well than anybody

BJP dani gurunchi entha takkuva mataldithe antha manchidi

Anduke kada M*dda kudipadu.. Nehru was nepo kid.. manage chestu paiki vachadu...Antha bomma ledu

[andhra_jp]

“One of the main criticisms against Nehru’s handling of the Kashmir question is that he stopped the advance of Indian troops, resulting in the declaration of a ceasefire when the Indian army had an upper hand and could have got the entire Kashmir valley vacated of the invading tribals and Pakistani aggressors”

“On 29 December 1947, Nehru had written to Patel: 
‘Among the consequences [of war] to consider are the possible effect on the British officers in the army and also the reaction of the Governor-General (that is, that he may decide to leave India).’ 
 

Did the possibility of Mountbatten’s departure weaken Nehru’s resolve regarding the military option? (Sarila 2005; pp.371–2)”

“On 1 January 1948 India decided to take the Kashmir issue to the United Nations.” “This was done on the advice of the governor general, Lord Mountbatten. 

Since Kashmir had acceded to it, India wanted the UN to help clear the northern parts of what it said was an illegal occupation by groups loyal to Pakistan.”
“Through January and February the Security Council held several sittings on Kashmir. 
Pakistan, represented by the superbly gifted orator Sir Zafrullah Khan, was able to present a far better case than India. 
Khan convinced the delegates that the invasion was a consequence of the tragic riots across northern India in 1946–7; it was a ‘natural’ reaction of Muslims to the sufferings of their fellows. 
He accused the Indians of perpetrating ‘genocide’ in East Punjab, forcing 6 million Muslims to flee to Pakistan. 
The Kashmir problem was recast as part of the unfinished business of Partition. 
India suffered a significant symbolic defeat when the Security Council altered the agenda item from the ‘Jammu and Kashmir Question’ to the ‘India–Pakistan Question’.”
 

“A striking feature of the UN discussions on Kashmir was the partisanship of the British. 
Their representative, Philip Noel-Baker, vigorously supported the Pakistani position. The British bias was deeply resented by the Indians. 
Some saw it as a hangover from pre-Independence days, a conversion for support to the Muslim League to support for Pakistan. 
Others thought it was in compensation for the recent creation of the state of Israel, after which there was a need to placate Muslims worldwide. 
A third theory was that in the ensuing struggle with Soviet Russia, Pakistan would be the more reliable ally. 
It was also better placed, with easy access to British air bases in the Middle East.”
“By now, Nehru bitterly regretted going to the United Nations.
 He was shocked, he told Mountbatten, to find that ‘power politics and not ethics’ were ruling an organization which ‘was being completely run by the Americans’, 
 who, like the British, ‘had made no bones of [their] sympathy for the Pakistan case’.”
 

“We were to find much to our dismay that in the United Nations, cases are not decided on merit but through a peculiar system of international horse-trading, blocs, and extraneous considerations. (Dharma Vira 1975; pp.36–7)”
 

“Another facet which comes out clearly is the effort made by Britain to bring about the partition of J&K. 
Sheikh Abdullah was clearly in favour of such a partition. 
 

Surprisingly, Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel also appeared to be in favour of such a partition. (Sarila 2005; pp.377, 380, 387, 390)”

“There is a lot of contradictory opinion about Sardar Patel’s attitude towards Kashmir. 
Some say the patriotic and determined Patel would have ensured that Kashmir in its entirety remained with India at any cost; 
others argue that the pragmatic Patel would have easily given away Kashmir to keep the peace, especially since, unlike Nehru, he did not have any familial affinity towards the Himalayan state.”

Source :  Hindol Sengupta. “The Man Who Saved India”

[Pavanonline]

2 hours ago, andhra_jp said:

“One of the main criticisms against Nehru’s handling of the Kashmir question is that he stopped the advance of Indian troops, resulting in the declaration of a ceasefire when the Indian army had an upper hand and could have got the entire Kashmir valley vacated of the invading tribals and Pakistani aggressors”

“On 29 December 1947, Nehru had written to Patel: 
‘Among the consequences [of war] to consider are the possible effect on the British officers in the army and also the reaction of the Governor-General (that is, that he may decide to leave India).’ 
 

Did the possibility of Mountbatten’s departure weaken Nehru’s resolve regarding the military option? (Sarila 2005; pp.371–2)”

“On 1 January 1948 India decided to take the Kashmir issue to the United Nations.” “This was done on the advice of the governor general, Lord Mountbatten. 

Since Kashmir had acceded to it, India wanted the UN to help clear the northern parts of what it said was an illegal occupation by groups loyal to Pakistan.”
“Through January and February the Security Council held several sittings on Kashmir. 
Pakistan, represented by the superbly gifted orator Sir Zafrullah Khan, was able to present a far better case than India. 
Khan convinced the delegates that the invasion was a consequence of the tragic riots across northern India in 1946–7; it was a ‘natural’ reaction of Muslims to the sufferings of their fellows. 
He accused the Indians of perpetrating ‘genocide’ in East Punjab, forcing 6 million Muslims to flee to Pakistan. 
The Kashmir problem was recast as part of the unfinished business of Partition. 
India suffered a significant symbolic defeat when the Security Council altered the agenda item from the ‘Jammu and Kashmir Question’ to the ‘India–Pakistan Question’.”
 

“A striking feature of the UN discussions on Kashmir was the partisanship of the British. 
Their representative, Philip Noel-Baker, vigorously supported the Pakistani position. The British bias was deeply resented by the Indians. 
Some saw it as a hangover from pre-Independence days, a conversion for support to the Muslim League to support for Pakistan. 
Others thought it was in compensation for the recent creation of the state of Israel, after which there was a need to placate Muslims worldwide. 
A third theory was that in the ensuing struggle with Soviet Russia, Pakistan would be the more reliable ally. 
It was also better placed, with easy access to British air bases in the Middle East.”
“By now, Nehru bitterly regretted going to the United Nations.
 He was shocked, he told Mountbatten, to find that ‘power politics and not ethics’ were ruling an organization which ‘was being completely run by the Americans’, 
 who, like the British, ‘had made no bones of [their] sympathy for the Pakistan case’.”
 

“We were to find much to our dismay that in the United Nations, cases are not decided on merit but through a peculiar system of international horse-trading, blocs, and extraneous considerations. (Dharma Vira 1975; pp.36–7)”
 

“Another facet which comes out clearly is the effort made by Britain to bring about the partition of J&K. 
Sheikh Abdullah was clearly in favour of such a partition. 
 

Surprisingly, Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel also appeared to be in favour of such a partition. (Sarila 2005; pp.377, 380, 387, 390)”

“There is a lot of contradictory opinion about Sardar Patel’s attitude towards Kashmir. 
Some say the patriotic and determined Patel would have ensured that Kashmir in its entirety remained with India at any cost; 
others argue that the pragmatic Patel would have easily given away Kashmir to keep the peace, especially since, unlike Nehru, he did not have any familial affinity towards the Himalayan state.”

Source :  Hindol Sengupta. “The Man Who Saved India”

Basic ga verripappa ni chesaru britishers veedini. Ee naivety chala chotla kanapadatadi nehru foreign policy decisions lo. He's either corrupt or plainly dumb, I believe it's a bit of both.

[lollilolli2020]

context ae teliyakunda okaru initiation tisukunnaru okaru initiation tisukoledu ani enduku fake propagandalu chestharu, there are lot of things on their table at that time, who knows ? do you know ?

alantappudu India lo jariginavi anni twitter lo nunchi erukoni raaku; 
twitter lo nunchi erukochchii ikkada labo dibo mante ela; 
ask yourself do you know ani. same logic nee pichakuntla postlu esukune mundu ask yourself.

[lollilolli2020]

18 hours ago, Spartan said:

 

  .AIDS to poyadu antaru mari.. 

AIDS kaadu syphlis heart attack ani talk mari. 

[andhra_jp]

1 hour ago, Pavanonline said:

Basic ga verripappa ni chesaru britishers veedini. Ee naivety chala chotla kanapadatadi nehru foreign policy decisions lo. He's either corrupt or plainly dumb, I believe it's a bit of both.

With what i understand by reading few books on Nehru i agree that in many adminisration decisions he is plain dumb but not really corrupt and he is genuinely patriotic and loyal to the country..

He is inefficient executive and an incompetent administrator.

With regards to corruption surely his administration was corrupt be it "Mundhra Scandal"  which his son-in-law Feroze Gandhi has exposed and it forced then finance minister T.T. Krishnamachari to resign and Morarji Desai replaced him.

[Pavanonline]

Just now, andhra_jp said:

With what i understand by reading few books on Nehru i agree that in many adminisration decisions he is plain dumb but not really corrupt and he is genuinely patriotic and loyal to the country..

He is inefficient executive and an incompetent administrator.

With regards to corruption surely his administration was corrupt be it "Mundhra Scandal"  which his son-in-law Feroze Gandhi has exposed and it forced then finance minister T.T. Krishnamachari to resign and Morarji Desai replaced him.

Corruption can come in other ways too, in this case mountbatten wife could have been a spy trap by British

[andhra_jp]

7 minutes ago, Pavanonline said:

Corruption can come in other ways too, in this case mountbatten wife could have been a spy trap by British

We can discuss endless  "could have been" conspiracy scenarios but given current data available i am inclined towards saying Nehru as a person is very loyal indian citizen but does not mean he is efficient administrator as we can see many failures in govt policies...  

Personally i have liking towards Nehru though i hate Nehru/Gandhi useless dynasty politicians ..

[Joker_007]

21 hours ago, bhaigan said:

Nehru is a Kashmiri pandit first, Nehru knows about Kashmir very well than anybody

BJP dani gurunchi entha takkuva mataldithe antha manchidi

andukena Pakistan iche plan vesadu... 

[pichhipullayya]

20 hours ago, bhaigan said:

There are lot of things in Kashmir, he tried a lot to unite kashmir

aa time lo states annitini Indian union lo kalapadaniki He and patel doing their respective job, obviously Nehru took kashmir task, dani meeda Nehru entha varaku success avvalo antha varaku sucess avvadaniki try chesadu, ee vishyam lo BJP WhatsApp university chesthunna fake propaganda lo nijam ledu

Pakistan was already doing that putting in UN, Nehru kuda to get Indian side justice nenu kuda UN lo pedata annadu kani there is no any wrong intention in that, you know how many wars happened after that, Nehru was depressed aa badha tho ne chanipoyadu. So ee entire episode lo Nehru ni blame cheyadam chala pedda tappu

Anna 

Did u stand beside him and see what he did ?

STDs tho poyaadu ani antaaru ?